State Audit and Administrative Control Bureau (SAACB) Annual Report 2018 in Palestine

The procedures undertaken to fill the positions of Assistant Prosecutor for vacancies for the year 2018 in Palestine
A tendency toward bias and double standards ...and a departure from transparency, integrity and equality)...!!
 The General Administration for Oversight of Governance "Civil and Security" audited the procedures for appointing Assistant Public Prosecutors for financial vacancies for the year 2018...whose number of posts allocated to the Public Prosecution reached, after the Higher Committee for the Job Establishment Schedule approved granting the Public Prosecution (5) financial vacancies for the position of Assistant Prosecutor...and rotating (20) employees into the position of (Assistant Prosecutor) from government departments

 The following observations were recorded:

 The Inspection Department in the Public Prosecution did not supervise the process of receiving applications for the position, contrary to the provisions of the law.

There was a duplicity in the mechanism for applying for the position such that applications were submitted by appearing in person at the Public Prosecution headquarters and receiving the notification, or by submitting via e-mail, and the notification was not received...
 Applications of candidates for the positions were screened, and it was noted that some applications were accepted for the written exam despite not attaching the law license in the application for candidacy for the competition...and there is no reasonable confirmation that they obtained the license.

Some applicants holding a law license were not included in the list of lawyers meeting the conditions, and therefore did not appear for the written exam...

Applications were accepted from applicants who had not obtained a law practice certificate and who were still trainees and had not obtained the practice certificate by the date of the announcement of the positions...despite the fact that some other trainee lawyers submitted applications and their applications were rejected..

 A total of 545 lawyer applicants and 64 employees from government departments sat for the exam, and 60 points were allocated to the written exam for applicants, with the passing score considered 20/60 for applicants from government employees, and the passing score considered 25/60 for the lawyer applicants for the exam
 A difference in the passing scores for employees was noted..which does not achieve equality and equal opportunity..
 The Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights did not participate in attending the written exam...and no representative from the Ministry of Justice was invited..contrary to the law..

 After reviewing the original answer booklets, we noticed that the names of the exam candidates were not fully and properly sealed.

 The passing mark adopted to qualify for the oral interviews was 20/60 and 25/60, noting that these marks are less than half...contrary to the prescribed procedures.

By examining a sample of applicants' answer booklets...and reviewing the grading of the answers according to the model answer prepared by the Public Prosecution...it became apparent that in some cases some exam candidates were awarded marks for completely incorrect answers.!!!.which affected their passing of the written exam and their entry into the oral interview..and thus there was bias in the correction of the answers..!!

 It was observed that some applicants were accepted for the oral interview despite not passing the written exam, and others were excluded from the oral interviews on the grounds that they did not pass the exam, while they deserve high marks that qualify them to enter the oral interview..

Result: "That all the procedures carried out to fill the positions of معاون النيابه للاحداثات الوظيفيه for 2018 were not conducted in accordance with the procedures governing appointments according to proper form and the law...and as regulated in the relevant legislation...and among these we find differentiation and duplicity in dealing with a certain category in favor of another category without observing the principle of transparency..and integrity and equality...in all procedures, and the monopolization of some procedures that were carried out in isolation from the competent and relevant authorities..and therefore the recommendation to the President for appointment constituted a clear transgression of the legal texts and a disregard for observing equivalent legal positions"....!!

 The Public Prosecution responded to the Bureau's report and based on what was stated therein, the Attorney General issued a decision to cancel the appointment procedures that had been carried out on the announcement...

 The Attorney General's decision to cancel the appointment procedures carried out on the announcement..was in the interest of justice and transparency and equality....and this is a decision we respect...!!

 Those who committed all these violations during the stages of appointment remain; we hope that they were punished appropriately and according to proper procedures !!